Israel CAN live with nuclear Iran, yes, but of course what country on earth would live with the Israeli Nuclear State as a non-nuclear partner? USA? NO, resoundingly NO

Dobbins to Debate Whether Israel Can Live with a Nuclear Iran  ~  Amb. James Dobbins, director of the RAND International Security and Defense Policy Center, argues that “Israel Can Live with a Nuclear Iran” this Wednesday (Jan. 16) in a live debate at 6:45 p.m. EST at Merkin Concert Hall in New York City. He will be joined by Reuven Pedatzur, senior military-affairs analyst with the newspaper Ha’aretz, who also will argue in favor of that point. Shmuel Bar, director of studies at the Institute of Policy and Strategy in Israel and a former Israeli intelligence officer, and Jeffrey Goldberg, a national correspondent for The Atlantic, will argue against it.

 

The debate is part of a series of live, Oxford-style debates hosted by Intelligence Squared U.S. It will be webcast here: http://intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/upcoming-debates/item/793-israel-can-live-with-a-nuclear-iran and shown on PBS stations (check local listings).

Obama's AfPak envoy may embrace Iran, By M K Bhadrakumar

... Dobbins recalled that there were no takers in Washington for the Iranian proposal although he approached the then secretary of state, Colin Powell, and national security advisor Condoleeza Rice and was even briefed an inter-agency meeting attended by defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Without doubt, what Dobbins brings into Obama's team is an invaluable insight into where things began going haywire for the US in Afghanistan, by overlooking "the impossibility of holding together disintegrating societies without the cooperation of adjoining states".

Dobbins concluded his testimony with the following advice to the Bush administration: "It's time to speak to Iran, unconditionally, and comprehensively."

Of course, Dobbins didn't carry sufficient weight within the Bush administration, and the diplomatic path he pursued with the Iranians ended in a cul-de-sac, almost inevitably. This is where Obama could make all the difference.

To be sure, Dobbins' selection as the special representative will be noted with interest in Tehran. The Iranian diplomats who dealt with him still have warm words to speak of him. They acknowledge him as a formidable champion of US interests and a tough negotiator, but also recognize him as a realist who has tried to understand without pride and prejudice the Iranian motivations too.

The heart of the matter is that the US has nothing to lose and everything to gain by reviving the collaboration with Iran over the stabilization of the Afghan situation. The peace talks with the Taliban have not taken off, and the Taliban spring offensive has begun. Five American soldiers were killed in an ambush on Saturday.

Meanwhile, Pakistan's strategic ambiguity has continued. The Afghan-Pakistani tensions are spiraling with the eruption of clashes between security forces on the Durand Line. The prospects appear more remote than ever that that Islamabad will permit any substantive direct talks to take place between the Taliban and Karzai's government. All this is when the US troop withdrawal is gathering momentum.

Suffice to say, an opening to Tehran can entirely change the matrix in favor of the overall US strategy in the period ahead. Iran is a stakeholder in the stabilization of Afghanistan. It enjoys considerable influence within that country.

If Dobbins is true to his word in his seminal 2011 monograph titled "Afghan peace Talks: A Primer", a substantial American military engagement is becoming necessary beyond the 2014 deadline now that it is clear that the negotiations with the Taliban are getting nowhere.

However, Dobbins also forewarned in the monograph that much water has flowed under the US-Iranian bridge and Tehran today is "likely to have a low level of trust in American intentions". This is how Dobbins estimated Iran's hardcore, "must have" objectives in Afghanistan:

1. The "eventual withdrawal" of American and International Security Assistance Force military and intelligence forces from Afghanistan;
2. A stable Afghanistan with a regime in Kabul that is friendly to Iran and not dominated by Pakistan or Pakistan's Taliban proxies.

Clearly, the Iranian objectives do not necessarily clash with Obama's Afghan strategy. But then, the big question remains, as Dobbins noted: "The rhythm of Iranian support for or obstruction of a peace process is more likely to depend on timelines external to Afghanistan, such as progress in Iran's nuclear program, competition between Iran and the Gulf states, and Iran's long-standing tensions with the United States."

Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.

(Copyright 2013 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.) 

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/SOU-01-070513.html